a large amount, I do not consider that appropriate; rather, its owner should be punished, for this would entail the loss of considerable wealth.” He means giving a large amount of it in charity.

Some scholars said:

“According to Mālik’s position, it makes no difference whether the amount is small or large, since he treated saffron, milk, and musk alike in this regard, in small and large quantities. Ibn al-Qāsim disagreed with him, holding that only a small amount should be given in charity. This applies when the person himself adulterated it. As for someone found in possession of adulterated goods that he did not adulterate himself, but purchased, received as a gift, or inherited, there is no disagreement that none of them is to be given away in charity.”

Among those who ruled that fraudulently produced clothing may be destroyed was Ibn al-Qattān. Concerning poorly woven wraps, he said, “They are to be burned.” Ibn ‘Attāb ruled instead that they should be given in charity, saying, “They are to be cut into rags and given to the needy if those responsible for them have been warned but have failed to desist.” He likewise ruled that adulterated bread should be given to the needy. Ibn al-Qattān objected to this, saying, “It is not lawful to do this with a Muslim’s property without his permission.”

Judge Abū al-Usbu‘ said:

“This shows inconsistency in his answer and contradiction in his position, since his ruling that the wraps should be burned is harsher than giving this bread to the needy. Ibn ‘Attāb is more consistent in applying his underlying principle in this matter and more faithful to his stated position.”

If the ruler does not consider punishing the adulterator by giving his goods in charity or destroying them appropriate, then he must